未来能源研究所-对于气候和贸易政策_共同但有区别的责任_原则是双向的（英）-2025.5_6页_525kb

Common but Differentiated Responsibilities (CBDR) in Climate and Trade Policies

Background

• CBDR, established in the UNFCCC (1992), assigns varying emission reduction responsibilities based on historical contributions and national capabilities.
• It has extensions: Respective Capabilities (RC) emphasizes current economic/technological capacities, while the Paris Agreement considers "National Circumstances."

Interpretations of CBDR

• Historical Responsibility: Developed countries should take the lead due to higher historical emissions (e.g., US, EU).
• Capabilities: Capabilities-based approaches (RC) prioritize current economic conditions, raising equity concerns.
• Equity vs. Trade Rules: Policies like Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanisms (CBAMs) risk conflicting with WTO’s Most-Favored Nation (MFN) principle by discriminating against countries with no domestic carbon pricing.

Challenges

• Carbon leakage: Competitiveness issues when domestic industries face higher costs vs. imports from countries without carbon pricing. CBAMs aim to level the playing field but may unfairly impact developing nations.
• Extraterritorial effects: Localizing the environmental impact is difficult, raising questions under international law.

Proposed Approaches

1. Revenue Recycling: Use CBAM revenues to fund international climate finance without double taxation, potentially with graduated credits based on GDP per capita.
2. Tiered Corrections: Adjust CBAM charges proportionally to countries' development levels to ensure fairness.
3. Technology Transfer: Facilitate low-carbon technology (e.g., carbon capture, green energy) to exporting jurisdictions to offset their carbon fees — complemented by carbon floor prices.
4. Facilitative Crediting & Flexible Design: Allow tougher domestic decarbonization paired with crediting mechanisms for lower-income countries to offset CBAM charges.

Interoperable Policy Framework

• Consider spillover effects and interoperability to lower compliance burden for companies across nations.
• Bilateral agreements (e.g., US ‘Foreign Pollution Fee Act’) require prior engagement with developing nations to detail fee exemptions.

Conclusion
CBDR cuts both ways: while developed countries have the responsibility to drive rapid decarbonization, developing countries need support to avoid competitiveness harm. Balancing trade fairness, equity, and climate action requires diplomatic flexibility and nuanced policy design under existing trade rules.